Results 3681 - 3700 of 4232
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: kalos Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
3681 | If our answers relied on Scripture alone | Hebrews | kalos | 1386 | ||
I agree the Scripture does need to be interpreted. But, when one interprets, there are sound principles of interpretation that one should follow. Back before 1900 A.D. a group of men gathered around a kitchen table armed only with the King James Version of the Bible and an English dictionary. They took the words of the Bible in an overly literal sense and then gave symbolic meaning to what THEY felt was symbolic. They pretended there was no such thing as 1900 years of the historic Christian faith which could shed some light on the Bible. The result? The Watchtower Society, better known as the Jehovah's Witnesses. Bible interpretation is not a word game for amateurs. Notice that one of the gifts of the Spirit to the church is teachers. | ||||||
3682 | If our answers relied on Scripture alone | Hebrews | kalos | 1405 | ||
Greetings, bjanko! You made my day. Your reply, "I agree with you 100 percent," is not what I was expecting. I don't know what I was expecting, but it wasn't your 100 percent agreement. Thank you for the many, many stimulating questions, answers and notes you have submitted to this website. Sincerely, JVH0212 | ||||||
3683 | If our answers relied on Scripture alone | Hebrews | kalos | 1458 | ||
Dear bjanko, In my previous reply to you, "I agree the Scripture does need to be interpreted", JVH0212 Sun 03-18-01, 9:36am, I said the following: "...when one interprets, there are sound principles of interpretation that one should follow." I would like to expand a little on my comment. Briefly, the principles of interpretation are: 1) Interpret grammatically and historically. 2) Interpret according to the immediate and wider contexts. 3) Interpret in harmony with the whole Bible by comparing scripture with scripture. . . . Articles, chapters and entire books have been written on the principles of interpretation, but I hope the above will suffice to sum it all up in few words. |
||||||
3684 | If our answers relied on Scripture alone | Hebrews | kalos | 1462 | ||
100 percent agreement! That's fantastic! You know, I never deliberately set out to pick an argument or to upset anyone. I try to answer Bible questions as accurately and as concisely as I can. It gives me no pleasure to know that some of what I write will conflict with the personal beliefs and opinions of others. At all times I try to include one or more clear verses of Scripture to support what I say. And I avoid speculation as much as possible. Thanks for your note, bjanko. Have a great day in the Lord. | ||||||
3685 | If our answers relied on Scripture alone | Hebrews | kalos | 1476 | ||
Oh, I knew you were kidding about that part. I should have made that clear in my reply. You know, talk about controversy -- I think if I wrote an entry and all I did was quote John 3:16, someone would write in finding fault. Such things as: "Well, why didn't you quote verse 17 along with verse 16? Don't you know you're not supposed to add to or take away the words of the Bible?" You know what I mean? Maybe I'll try it as an experiment one day. Thanks for your fellowship and good wishes. In Christ, JVH0212 |
||||||
3686 | I agree with you 100 percent. But... | Hebrews | kalos | 2468 | ||
I agree with you. For example, you write: "To say that a true believer would choose to leave, betrays a total misunderstanding of what salvation is." I believe that if we understood what salvation is -- what made our salvation possible, the fact that salvation is "of the Lord" (not of our weak human efforts), what takes place when a person gets saved, what all God does for and in an individual when He saves that individual -- if we understood what salvation IS, we would have a clearer understanding that the believer now possesses Eternal Life. We would better understand that God does the saving and God does the keeping. There is not one thing you and I can do to merit or earn our salvation, keep it, or add anything to it. | ||||||
3687 | When may a church compromise the Bible? | Hebrews | kalos | 17237 | ||
I would recommend that you NOT watch or listen to Kenneh Copeland, Joyce Meyer or any other Word Faith teachers. Why not Joyce Meyer? See the following posting: "Did Jesus spend 3 days in hell? Answer Bible general kalos Mon 09/24/01, 7:51am." Why not Kenneth Copeland? See below. Word of faith movement Concerning the teaching known variously as “positive confession,” the “faith” teaching, and the “prosperity” doctrine, some of the best known American television evangelists subscribe either partly or wholly to this teaching. Its chief representatives today seem to be Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Hagin, Fred Price, Paul and Jan Crouch, John Avanzini, Benny Hinn, Jesse Duplantis, and Marilyn Hickey, though there are many other evangelists, teachers, and writers promoting the teaching. It is CRI’s considered opinion that this teaching, at least in its complete form as expressed by the above people, is at best extremely aberrational and at worse cultic. (We use the term “aberrational” to refer to teaching which is decidedly unbiblical and damaging to authentic Christian faith, but which is not quite so heretical that its adherents must be considered non-Christians.) In the past, CRI has attempted to meet with some of these people and dialogue with them concerning their teachings, but most of them have refused. In brief, the teachings of these men may be summarized as follows: God created man in “God’s class,” as “little gods,” with the potential to exercise the “God kind of faith” in calling things into existence and living in opportunity, however, by rebelling against God in the Garden and taking upon ourselves Satan’s nature. To correct this situation, Jesus Christ became a man, died spiritually (thus taking upon Himself Satan’s nature), went to Hell, was “born again,” rose from the dead with God's nature again, and then sent the Holy Spirit so that the Incarnation could be duplicated in believers, thus fulfilling their calling to be little gods. Since we are called to experience this kind of life now, we should be successful in every area of our lives. To be in debt, then, or be sick, or (as is often taught) be left by one’s spouse, and not to have these problems go away by “claiming” God’s promises, shows a lack of faith. While certain aspects of the above doctrine may vary from teacher to teacher, the general outline remains the same in each case. Perhaps the above summary will be enough for some readers to convince them that the doctrine of the “faith” teachers is unbiblical. If more details in the way of documentation are required, or if some analysis of the biblical passages used by the “faith” teachers to support their views is needed, these can be found in a variety of materials, many of which are available from CRI. (http://www.equip.org/search/) |
||||||
3688 | When may a church compromise the Bible? | Hebrews | kalos | 17310 | ||
You disagree with what? That what I have cited in my previous post is what the Word Faith teachers actually teach and believe? I didn't make this up. Everything stated in the previous post regarding their teachings is documented. Or do you disagree that what they teach is dangerous, heretical doctrine? If you think their doctrine, as stated in the previous post, is Biblical and orthodox, that there is nothing objectionalbe in it, then I suggest you start from scratch and study the Bible to learn its fundamental, essential doctrines. The fact that you personally have not heard or read any of their teachings that I have presented doesn't necessarily mean anything. Have you read every publication of Copeland and Meyer? Have you read their every writing? Heard their every utterance? Have you seen every minute of every TV show they've preached on? Have you sat in every last meeting in which they have preached? Are you willing to you concede that they may have written or said something that you might not have heard or read? Your loyalty to them is supported by neither fact, logic nor scripture. |
||||||
3689 | When may a church compromise the Bible? | Hebrews | kalos | 17366 | ||
What is there to discuss? You remain loyal to Kenneth Copeland and Joyce Meyer. Good for you. As for arguing, I wouldn't waste my time arguing about the dangerous and heretical teachings of the Word Faith movement. |
||||||
3690 | When may a church compromise the Bible? | Hebrews | kalos | 17378 | ||
You write: You do not know me, or my beliefs. You do not know my relationship to Kenneth Copeland or Joyce Meyers. You assume alot. I was hoping that maybe we could talk on a point by point basis. I am interested to know where you get your information. I am also interested in finding out more about this "Word Faith" movement. Kelkat ******************************** I don't know you or your beliefs? I do not know your relationship to Copeland or Meyers? I assume a lot? I recently advised someone on the forum not to follow the teachings of Copeland or Meyers. You then wrote a reply in which you defended them and/or the Word Faith movement. Now you are saying I don't know your beliefs and I assume a lot? If you defend someone, is it not a fair assumption that you hold to their teachings and beliefs.? You want to talk on a point by point basis? When I wrote "You disagree with what? That what I have... kalos Tue 09/25/01, 11:18am," I asked specific questions to clarify what you disagreed with and what you meant? If you had chosen to answer them, it might have led to a dialogue. Instead you chose to ignore them. Where did I get my information was a question I answered in the original posting. It was answered when I included my sources in the Note. |
||||||
3691 | Can we agree? | Hebrews | kalos | 17936 | ||
I'm not saying the Word Faith teachers never reversed their earlier statements. All I am saying is that if they did, I am not aware of it. So I sincerely want to know: When did any of the Word Faith preachers or teachers ever reverse their earlier statements? When did any of them "refute" what they had taught earlier? (Note that I am not asking when did any of them contradict himself/herself. I will allow for the possibility that they have contradicted themselves.) If you know the answer to my questions, please cite the name and date of the publication in which they reversed or refuted what they had earlier taught. "I'm glad to know that I am not judged today on what I said, thought, or did 10 years ago." Really? "But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment" (Matthew 12:36 KJV). "You can be sure that on the Judgment Day you will have to give account of every useless word you have ever spoken" (TEV). |
||||||
3692 | Can we agree? | Hebrews | kalos | 17938 | ||
Isn't it an interesting coincidence(?) that many of the people who "walk away from God" do so because of false teachers, false doctrine, deception, bad teaching, heresy or apostasy? Do you not see a direct cause/effect relatiohship between false doctrine and people walking away from God (whatever that means)? We have a duty as Christians to expose and rid ourselves of false prophets and false teachers about whom we are repeatedly and sternly warned in the New Testament. If one cannot recognize false teachers and false doctrine when they hear it, then they are without discernment in these matters. They had better spend their time learning what the Bible plainly teaches, instead of criticizing those who dare to warn others about the harm done by false doctrine. |
||||||
3693 | Can we agree? | Hebrews | kalos | 17939 | ||
"Apostasy, Summary: Apostasy, "falling away," is the act of professed Christians who deliberately reject revealed truth "(1) as to the deity of Jesus Christ, and "(2) redemption through His atoning and redeeming sacrifice 1 John 4:1-3; Philippians 3:18 ; 2 Peter 2:1 . Apostasy differs from error concerning truth, which may be the result of ignorance Acts 19:1-6 or heresy, which may be due to the sphere of Satan 2 Timothy 2:25,26 both of which may consist with true faith. The apostate is perfectly described in 2 Timothy 4:3,4 . Apostates depart from the faith, but not from the outward profession of Christianity 2 Timothy 3:5. Apostate teachers are described in ; 2 Timothy 4:3; 2 Peter 2:1-19; Jude 1:4,8,11-13,16 . "Apostasy in the church, as in Israel Isaiah 1:5,6; 5:5-7 is irremediable, and awaits judgment ; 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12 ; 2 Peter 2:17,21; Jude 1:11-15; Revelation 3:14-16." Bibliography Information Scofield, C.I. "Scofield Reference Notes on 2 Tim 3". "Scofield Reference Notes (1917 Edition)". http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/ScofieldReferenceNotes/ 1917. |
||||||
3694 | Can we agree? | Hebrews | kalos | 17941 | ||
False Prophet "Even though the Old Testament does not use the term "false prophet, " it is clear that such "professional prophets" existed throughout much of Israel's history and that they were diametrically opposed to the canonical prophets. Scripture, however, regarded them as mere imitations of the genuinely appointed prophets of God. "Distinguishing Marks of False Prophecy and False Prophets. It was the Septuagint translators who introduced the term pseudoprophetes ("false prophet") ten times where the Hebrew text simply used the generic term nabi ("prophet") But the Hebrew text nevertheless still made the same point with the whole battery of negative descriptions. "False prophets prophesied lies, deceived the people with their dreams, prophesied by the alleged authority of Baal, threatened the lives of the true prophets, and dared to speak when they had not stood in the council of Yahweh and received a word directly from the Lord. Typically, their prophecies promised peace when there was no peace to be had, for their visions were drawn out of their own hearts . "Some false prophets used magic, others appeared to use divination, soothsaying, witchcraft, necromancy, and sorcery, which were all forbidden arts and practices in the classical passage that set forth divine revelation in contrast to such practices (Deut 18:9-13). The false prophets gave the people what they wanted to hear and thereby placed "whitewash" over every situation, no matter how adverse it appeared. "The fullest discussion of charges that could be brought against false prophets can be found in Jeremiah 23:9-39. Jeremiah condemns the pseudoprophets on four grounds: (1) they are men of immoral character (v. 14—"they commit adultery and live a lie"); (2) they seek popular acclaim with their unconditional pledge of immunity from all imminent disasters (vv. 17-22); (3) they fail to distinguish their own dreams from a word from God (vv. 25-29); and (4) they are plagiarists who steal from one another words allegedly from the Lord (vv. 30-39). Rather than having a "burden" from the Lord, they themselves were another burden—both to the Lord and to the misled people!" To see all the Scripture references and/or to read the entire article, "False Prophet," click on the following link. (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Dictionaries/BakersEvangelicalDictionary/bed.cgi) Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology, edited by Walter A. Elwell, 1996, published by Baker Books, a division of Baker Book House Company, PO Box 6287, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49516-6287. |
||||||
3695 | Can we agree? | Hebrews | kalos | 17945 | ||
"While Benny Hinn at one point denounced the word-faith message, he later picked it up again. Representatives of CRI and other evangelical apologetics ministries say they have noticed a pattern of Hinn telling people behind the scenes that he has changed, but then going on as before." **************************************** Christianity Today on Benny Hinn "Benny Hinn is controversial for his theology, his practices, and his claims. While he at one point denounced the word-faith message, he later picked it up again. "Representatives of CRI and other evangelical apologetics ministries say they have noticed a pattern of Hinn telling people behind the scenes that he has changed, but then going on as before. (...) "Indeed, for those who have been keeping an eye on him, Hinn has proven to be difficult to pin down. Not long after telling Christianity Today that the ''faith message'' (as articulated by such teachers as Kenneth Copeland ) does not ''add up,'' Hinn said that speaking out against Copeland was tantamount to ''attacking the very presence of God.'' Also, though affirming the concept of a triune God , he continues to maintain that the Holy Spirit has a ''spirit-body.'' "In last year's interview with CT, Hinn said he would no longer use the term revelation knowledge in reference to some of his teachings because of the implication that those teachings were directly from God and thus infallible. While he has shunned the term revelation knowledge, just a few months ago on TV Hinn said that the Holy Spirit was at that moment teaching him that God originally designed women to give birth out of their sides. (...) "According to Hanegraaff , Hinn several times denied to him having made the statement about women and birth. Hanegraaff said he finally told Hinn where he could find the disputed remark on the videotaped sermon. Hinn later acknowledged making the statement, calling it ''dumb.'' Hanegraaff said that when he reminded Hinn that he had credited the Holy Spirit with the teaching, the evangelist chuckled and said he had actually picked up the teaching from the (1963) Dake's Annotated Reference Bible." Christianity Today, Oct. 5, 1992 (http://www.gospelcom.net/apologeticsindex/h01.html) |
||||||
3696 | Can we agree? | Hebrews | kalos | 17966 | ||
Evidence, please? Documentation? Can you cite a journal or newspaper article, including title of publication, date, name of article, etc.? Anyone can assert anything here. Do you have any proof? | ||||||
3697 | Can we agree? | Hebrews | kalos | 17968 | ||
CRI is not the issue here. It's an old, oft-used, cheap trick here on the forum that if you can't refute the other person's point, then you try to change the subject by attacking the reliability of the source quoted by the other person. As I say, it's an old trick, but not everyone falls for it. | ||||||
3698 | Can we agree? | Hebrews | kalos | 18003 | ||
Don't believe everything you read on the World Wide Web. I, too, went surfing for info on CRI. This is what I found: I have just come from checking out an anti-CRI/anti-Hannegraaff website. They have nothing good to say about CRI. They have leveled serious accusations against CRI in their many postings bashing the organization. Oh, I almost forgot to mention. The above anti-CRI website is also opposed to and strongly critical of the following: Benny Hinn; National Assoc. of Evangelicals; Tim and Beverly LaHaye; Larry Burkett; the Evangelical Free Church of America; Pat Robertson; D. James Kennedy; RC Sproul; Billy Graham; John MacArthur; Radio Bible Class and its principal publication "Our Daily Bread"; Campus Crusade for Christ; and Dr. James C. Dobson. Oh, yeah. They sound like a sane and sensible resource, don't they? (Go to www.rapidnet.com Then in the Search field type Biblical Discernment Ministries) |
||||||
3699 | COULD A BELIEVER LOSE THEIR SALVATION? | Hebrews | kalos | 27632 | ||
God does the saving and God does the keeping (Philippians 1:6). If you are saved, it won't be because you held on and held out. It will be because God held on to you. You state: "yes for he that knows to do well but don't is worse off than some one that don't know nothing." Could you give us the Bible book, chapter and verse where it says that? So are you saying that we are saved or that we keep our salvation by what we do? See Romans 3:28; Romans 4:5; Ephesians 2:8-9. Salvation is conditioned solely on faith in Jesus Christ. Nearly 200 times faith, or belief, is stated as the single condition in the N.T. (John 1:12; Acts 16:31). |
||||||
3700 | Is the Promised Land the Israel of today | Hebrews | kalos | 42386 | ||
"That the Christian now inherits the distinctive Jewish promises is not taught in Scripture." Rom 11:1 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. Taking the 11th chapter of Romans at face value, it is obvious that Paul is writing of literal Israel, literal Jews. "Of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin" is speaking of the literal offspring of Abraham and the literal tribe of Benjamin. "Avoid spiritualizing or allegorizing the Bible. This is that which gives to the Bible some kind of mystical meaning. In other words, what is on the surface is not the meaning, but what is hidden becomes the meaning. This is very popular. Allegorizing means to say that the historical meaning is not the real meaning, and in fact may be nothing but a fabrication. The historical meaning is not the real meaning, the real meaning is the spiritual meaning hidden beneath the surface. "And once you say that something in the Bible is an allegory, that is it is only a symbol of the reality, you have just made it impossible to know what that reality is because if that reality cannot be discerned through the normal understanding of language, how can it be discerned?" (from the radio message: "How to Study Your Bible: Interpretation" by John MacArthur on Grace to You broadcast) "That Israel has not been forever set aside is the theme of this chapter (Romans 11). "(1) The salvation of Paul proves that there is still a remnant (Romans 11:1 ) "(2) The doctrine of the remnant proves it (Romans 11:2-6). "(3) The present national unbelief was foreseen (Romans 11:7-10). "(4) Israel's unbelief is the Gentile opportunity (Romans 11:11-25). "(5) Israel is judicially broken off from the good olive tree, Christ (Romans 11:17-22 ). "(6) They are to be grafted in again (Romans 11:23,24). "(7) The promised Deliverer will come out of Zion and the nation will be saved (Romans 11:25-29). That the Christian now inherits the distinctive Jewish promises is not taught in Scripture. The Christian is of the heavenly seed of Abraham (Genesis 15:5,6; Galatians 3:29) and partakes of the spiritual blessings of the Abrahamic Covenant." "But Israel as a nation always has it own place and is yet to have its greatest exaltation as the earthly people of God." Bibliography Information Scofield, C.I. "Scofield Reference Notes on Jude 1". "Scofield Reference Notes (1917 Edition)". (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/ScofieldReferenceNotes/) 1917. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 ] Next > Last [212] >> |